I had the opportunity to discuss with Mr Bellot. He is an engineer by education, and thus very pragmatic. He tries to solve problems in a rational way, by sequences.

He had started to find a panel of international experts to give him a neutral opinion about the BRU noise issue. Only one company had submitted an offer, which had to be rejected because some of the experts involved had a relation with Brussels Airport. A new tender has to be organised, and it is impossible that the winner will issue conclusions before the next general election. Bellot is not a coward, but the first minister since a long time who tries to find a genuine solution.

And I am quite sure that he thinks about the MR electorate in Brussels as well. In fact there is no need for a tender; ICAO have specialists available; just give a call to Montreal.

Mr Bellot is from Rochefort in the Ardennes (also down-to-earth people) and doesn't give a damn about the MR electorate in Brussels. And the normal procedure for working for the State is a call for tender.

Mr Bellot is from Rochefort in the Ardennes (also down-to-earth people) and doesn't give a damn about the MR electorate in Brussels. And the normal procedure for working for the State is a call for tender.

Really? You can be sure that he already received some calls from the MR electorate in La Capitale. The MR needs to be ready for the next communal elections.

In BRUZZ today.
Brussels Airport is proposing to isolated houses...like it's already done in other airports in Belgium LGG,CRL.
That exactly what I proposed some posts ago another option in LGG was also give the possibility to buy the house's....

If it was in L'Echo, it was in French and it would have been better to post the original with what was "lost in translation".

Nevertheless, I spoke this morning with Philip Lawson, the journalist who wrote the article. In his view, this is the beginning of a solution for the BRU noise issue. In all airports in the world, they "concentrate and insulate". In Brussels, they disperse! Why not "concentrate and insulate" like in LGG and CRL?

Of course, the costs in the highly populated Brussels agglomeration would be much higher than in CRL or LGG, but there is already a fund with money available to start. Extending 25L to the East is part of that solution: the people under the prolonged 25L should be the first beneficiaries, together with the people of Woluwe mentioned in the article.

Of course, under special wind circumstances, there would still be people having more noise than usual, but that is only a minor disadvantage.

Have a look at google earth and you will understand the challenge and the difference with other airports.

My messages reflect my personal opinion which may be different than yours. I beleive a forum is made to create a debate so I encourage people to express themselves, the way they want, with the ideas they want. I expect the same understanding in return.

Without knowing every detail, I feel he has no reason to complain: nobody promised it would be easy to be a minister of transport. And if certain parties involved obstruct proceedings, it is for the government to govern - that is what they are paid for.

Without knowing every detail, I feel he has no reason to complain: nobody promised it would be easy to be a minister of transport. And if certain parties involved obstruct proceedings, it is for the government to govern - that is what they are paid for.

If they extend 25L and use it also for take off and there are no night flights over Brussels.

Plus a programme to isolate or buy the houses in Erps Kwerps,Kortenberg etc...I think we might find the solution.

You still don't get it, do you?

Brussels wants only the advantages of the airport: revenu generated from tourists, revenu generated by people working at the European Commission, revenu generated by people working at the Nato, revenu generated by people working at international headquarters, lobby firms, international press, ...

The disadvantages of the airport, specially the noise? They're for Flanders.

If they extend 25L and use it also for take off and there are no night flights over Brussels.

Plus a programme to isolate or buy the houses in Erps Kwerps,Kortenberg etc...I think we might find the solution.

You still don't get it, do you?

Brussels wants only the advantages of the airport: revenu generated from tourists, revenu generated by people working at the European Commission, revenu generated by people working at the Nato, revenu generated by people working at international headquarters, lobby firms, international press, ...

The disadvantages of the airport, specially the noise? They're for Flanders.

I don't think so but let's see time will tell..
It's so much more complex .

On request of Grimbergen, Machelen, Meise, Vilvoorde and Wemmel, a Judge has ruled that minister Bellot must make an aviation law before Februari 2020, and that minister Bellot must consult formally with all parties involved before 17th September 2018.